Department of Physiotherapy, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
School of Clinical Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Physiother Theory Pract. 2021 Mar;37(3):420-431. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2021.1887063. Epub 2021 Feb 15.
The history of physiotherapy can be seen as a history of boundary conflict, as the profession sought to first establish, then maintain, its distinctive professional identity. Traditional approaches to the sociology of the professions support this, seeing professionalization as an ongoing process of enclosure, encroachment, and conflict. Recent work, however, has emphasized the fluidity and collaborative nature of professionalization projects, and placed more emphasis on inter-professional negotiations and disciplinary coexistence. In this paper, we draw on this work to analyze the harmonization of the independent Mensendieck System of medical gymnastics in Norway, and the emerging state-sponsored physiotherapy system. Our contention is that over the course of the middle decades of the 20th century, advocates of the Mensendieck System and providers of orthodox, biomedically informed physiotherapy, came together and found a way to work collaboratively in a shared space without compromising their distinctive professional identities. We argue that this approach both points to ways we might revisit traditional conflict-based analyses of the history of physiotherapy, while also suggesting new ways of imagining how the profession might change in the years to come.
物理治疗的历史可以被视为边界冲突的历史，因为该专业试图首先建立，然后维护其独特的专业身份。传统的专业社会学方法支持这一点，将专业化视为一个不断的封闭、侵犯和冲突的过程。然而，最近的工作强调了专业化项目的流动性和协作性，并更加重视专业间的谈判和学科共存。在本文中，我们借鉴了这一工作，分析了挪威独立的门氏体操医学体系与新兴的国家赞助的物理治疗体系的协调。我们的论点是，在 20 世纪中叶的几十年里，门氏体操体系的倡导者和正统的、生物医学信息丰富的物理治疗提供者走到了一起，找到了一种在不损害其独特专业身份的情况下在共同空间内协作的方法。我们认为，这种方法不仅指出了我们如何重新审视物理治疗历史上基于传统冲突的分析的方法，也为我们如何想象该专业在未来几年可能发生的变化提供了新的思路。
